Archive 1986 – 2017

From the Spanish weekly “Articulo 20” No. 30, of June 14, 1999, about the NATO bombing raids against Yugoslavia and the role of Americans inmaking all decisions. By Jose Luis Morales The pilots of Spanish planes who participated in bombing raids against Yugoslavia do not feel like “supermen” nor as masters of air space. Quite on the contrary, they say that our forces play to the tune of music played by the North Americans, and accuse NATO of having honoured with medals the bombing of civilian targets, what they otherwise name “collateral damages”. Captain Adolfo Luis Martin de la Hoz, who returned to Spain end of May after having participated in the bombings since the beginning, an “authentic expert for the dreadful F-18”, the war plane most often used in the war strategy of “scorched land” in the Balkans, is very categoric: “First of all, I want to make it...

Ignore the Dangerous Precedent Set Media Advisory  As NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia neared its conclusion, the press began debating whether or not the war was a success. Many mainstream commentators and reporters were critical of NATO’s tactics, but NATO’s basic spin on the war–it was a just war waged against genocidal evil, and it has improved the region’s chances for peace and democracy–went almost unchallenged. The idea that the war in Kosovo has proved that military force is an integral part of a humanitarian foreign policy appeared again and again in the pages of the New York Times and Washington Post. As Thomas Friedman put it (New York Times, 6/4/99), if Slobodan Milosevic really carries out his end of the deal, then NATO’s action in Kosovo “will establish that an air war for limited humanitarian goals can be effective, albeit costly.” A Washington Post editorial of the same day followed...

This is what Marc Beginin wrote to TFF as an introduction to his letter to the New York Times. I am one of the few non-journalists who actually made an excursion to Rambouillet during the peace “negotiations.” At that time, it came home that the primary function of the modern, mainstream journalist was to simply to increase ratings of their representative organizations in order to increase advertising revenue. This means of course sensationalism, not offending the source, and black and white reporting. I was blown away by all the “correct” questions that were asked of the powers that be and the lack of interest in actually reporting the facts. It was an added shock when all the reporters poised questions to James Rubin, spokesperson for the Secretary of State and then a voice came from the back of the crowd lightly shouting “Jamie.” Mr. Rubin’s attention shifted and his face...

By JANE PERLEZThe New York Times June 11, 1999 COLOGNE, Germany — Although the political future of Kosovo is left vague in the settlement that ended the war, American and NATO officials say they envision an international protectorate that will in theory be part of Yugoslavia but that may well, after a few years, become independent. As refugees return and society is rebuilt, a senior NATO official said Thursday, Kosovo will become virtually “walled off” from Yugoslavia. People living in Kosovo would not serve in the Yugoslav Army or pay taxes to Yugoslavia; a new police force and judiciary would have to be created without Serbian influence; the currency would probably be either the German mark or the American dollar, and trade would turn south and west toward Albania, Macedonia and Montenegro instead of north toward Serbia. None of these points are spelled out in the settlement that President Slobodan...

1. Democratic Control of a Military Alliance: Challenges and Problems The recent NATO military intervention in FR Yugoslavia (24 March – 11 June, 1999) underlined an urgent need for addressing some very significant theoretical and political issues the two most important ones being: 1) the issue of legal use of military force in international relations, or more precisely on legitimacy of humanitarian interventions; 2) the issue of democratic control of a military alliance in action. Obviously, the first question is relatively old, while the second one emerged as a rather new one. However, in the light of the Kosovo war they appeared to be deeply interrelated. The NATO intervention over Yugoslavia should not be considered as the main reason for theoretical deliberation of this relationship, but rather as an appropriate occasion for bringing the discussion up. From a theoretical and a political point of view, the relationship between NATO and...

The Security Council, Bearing in mind the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security, Recalling its resolutions 1160 (1998) of 31 March 1998, 1199 (1998) of 23 September 1998, 1203 (1998) of 24 October 1998 and 1239 (1999) of 14 May 1999, Regretting that there has not been full compliance with the requirements of these resolutions, Determined to resolve the grave humanitarian situation in Kosovo, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and to provide for the safe and free return of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes, Condemning all acts of violence against the Kosovo population as well as all terrorist acts by any party, Recalling the statement made by the Secretary-General on 9 April 1999, expressing concern at the humanitarian tragedy taking place in Kosovo, Reaffirming the right of all refugees and displaced persons...

NATO Compellence as Global Norm Times of India By SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN DESPITE the imposition of a peace agreement on Belgrade last week and the tabling of a draft resolution in the UN Security Council, it is still not certain how the crisis in Kosovo will finally end. After violating every principle of international law and international humanitarian law for more than nine weeks by attacking a sovereign country, bombing civilian targets and killing some 1,500 non-combatants, one-third of whom were children, NATO has definitely achieved a measure of success. And yet, the draft UN resolution is ambiguous on the precise role NATO will play in the international peacekeeping force to be sent to Kosovo. It merely calls on “member states and relevant international organisations” to organise the force; NATO is mentioned only in an appendix and no leadership role is assigned to it. Nevertheless, the US insists the mission will...

Milosevic Held Out Againsta Humiliating Peace Accord Many of us were critical of the bombing campaign’swastefulness. In the end, we were proved right By Lewis MacKenzieThe Vancouver Sun How quickly some commentators, particularly in Canada and the United States, jumped on and off the Kosovo war bandwagon.Since the first hint of a ceasefire more than a week ago some reputable columnists proclaimed a NATO victory and declared that the air strikes worked to perfection in forcing President Slobodan Milosevic’s capitulation.They decried the retired politicians, bureaucrats and generals who said the air strikes would fail as a bunch of crybabies who were woefully out of date. Assuming that I was included in this condemnation I decided to research what some of the anti-bombing alumni had actually said. To my considerable pleasure I discovered that the Kissingers and Powells, the Lord Owens and Ambassador Bissetts of the world, and further down the...

“Where do I stand: very simply, I am against the NATO bombing, I am against ethnic cleansing, whether by Serbs or anybody else — for instance by the immigrants to North America who in the period 1600-1900 cleansed away about 10,000,000 American Indians. I find nothing original in my position. The only original position would be to be in favor of both, a view probably only entertained by arms dealers. There are those who try to make us believe that you have to make a choice between NATO and Milosevic; if you are against one for sure you are in favor of the other. Nonsense. Early on in this horrible decade many of the same people tried to make us believe that you had to make a choice between the Gulf war and Saddam Hussein; again, perfectly possible to be against both. Then, the second example of this terrible dualism,...

Napisao Dzon Galtung dr hc mult, profesor na mirovnim studijama, direktor TRANSCEND-a, Mreze za mir i razvoj, pridruzeni clan TFF-a. “Moj stav je – vrlo prosto – da se protivim bombardovanju NATO-a, a protivim se i etnickom ciscenju svejedno da li ga provode Srbi ili neko drugi – recimo useljenici u Severnu Ameriku koji su izmedju 1600 i 1900 ocistili oko 10.000.000 americkih Indijanaca. Ne mislim da moj stav izrazava bilo sta sto bi bilo stvarno novo ili jako originalno. Jedini originalan stav bio bi kad bi neko podrzavao i jedno i drugo, stav koji bi verovatno zadovoljio samo trgovce oruzjem. Veliki je broj onih koji nas uce kako je jedini dopusteni izbor onaj izmedju Milosevica i NATO-a; ako niste za jedno onda ste sigurno za ono drugo. Pa to je glupost! Jos pocetkom ove decenije, isti ovi ljudi su pokusali da nas ubede kako je jedini izbor koji nam...

“Here we go again: Media around the world tell us that there is a ‘peace’ process, ‘peace’ negotiations and a ‘peace’ agreement soon to be concluded. There will be NATO ‘peace-keepers’ in Kosovo. They tell that Yugoslavia and the Balkans are taking the first steps to long-term ‘peace’ and stability. To a peace professional it’s all Orwellian Newspeak. This authoritarian NATO operation bodes ill for the future, for world order, normativity, lawful governance, democracy, moral politics and indeed peace,” says TFF director Jan Oberg. “The present and future costs of this type of peace policy are unacceptable and out of proportion with the Albanian-Serb problem it purported to solve in the first place. Today Serbs and Albanians are more polarised and hateful than ever. The very least would be to stop using the word ‘peace’ under circumstances like this. There are those who say that there were no alternatives –...

“Evo nas jos jednom, uvek u istom krugu: mediji sirom sveta govore nam kako imamo “mirovni” proces, “mirovne” pregovore i “mirovni” sporazum koji ce uskoro biti zakljuceni. Imacemo i NATO-ove “mirotvorce” na Kosovu. Govore nam kako Jugoslavija i Balkan prave prve korake na putu ka dugorocnom “miru” i stabilnosti. Profesionalnim mirovnjacima to ne predstavlja nista drugo nego orvelijanski novgovor. Ova autoritarna operacija NATO-a opako sluti na zlo: za buducnost, za svetski poredak, za zakonodavstvo, za vladavinu zakona, za demokratiju, za moralnu politiku, pa ako hocete i za mir” kaze direktor TFF-a, Jan Oberg. “Cena koju vec placamo za ovakvu vrstu mirovne politike, a koju cemo nastaviti da placamo i u buducnosti nije samo neprihvatljivo visoka nego i uveliko nesrazmerna s realnom velicinom srpsko-albanskog problema koji je navodno uopste trebalo da se resi. Srbi i Albanci su danas udaljeniji jedni od drugih i njih danas razdvaja vise mrznje nego ikada pre....